[lug] [A bit OT] Xerces vs. Gnome XML (libxml)?

rm at fabula.de rm at fabula.de
Tue Jan 29 05:46:20 MST 2002

On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 03:49:44PM -0700, Scott A. Herod wrote:
> Hello,
>   A bit off topic but does anyone have any opinions about whether
> they would choose Xerces or libxml ( Gnome project ) for parsing
> XML and maintaining a DOM structure?  libxml does not have an included
> DOM parser but apparently there is an add-on available.  I've used
> Xerces and while bloated and licensed with the Apache license, it is
> a known evil.


first of all i should mention that i seldom use libxml's DOM interface.
I do use libxml in an production environment both from C as well as from
Perl, Python and Guile (i haven't published the guile bindings yet, in case
you look for them ;-) 
I found the library  to be a very fast and stable XML parser that is
_very_ standards-conformant (well, D. Veillard was a member of the w3c).
There's a pretty high quality mailing list and Daniel is rather fast in
spitting out bugfixes. Even so Daniel stresses the fact that he _didn't_
optimize for speed the parsing/transformation performance is rather
impressive -- i use the LibXSLT transformation library to do 'realtime'
XSLT transformation in Apache with no noticeable delay compared to 
static file delivery.

Ralf Mattes

P.S: i'm not too keen on C++ so i won't comment on Xerces bloatedness ..

> Thanks,
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug

More information about the LUG mailing list